Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

We have recommended that we should now embark on a process of debating in this parliament changes to the Marriage Act. We have recommended that this bill, with a few amendments, should be passed into law. We have recommended that Senator Hanson-Young's bill before us does need a few amendments. We think that the amendments ought to go to a definition that marriage is now between two people, regardless of their sex, to the exclusion of all others voluntarily entered into for life. We were convinced by the submissions put before us and by the evidence that we heard in Melbourne and Sydney that now is the time for this country to amend the Marriage Act, that now is the time for this country to move on and to accept that same-sex couples do, to the exclusion of all others and in a voluntary nature, decide to live with each other for the rest of their lives because they are so deeply in love with each other. We believe this is the last barrier to end that discrimination against those couples.

We also believe, although some would argue that marriage is a perfect fit between a man and a woman and it is designed for the sole reason of having children, that for a whole lot of people in this country marriage is not that. Marriage is not solely that. Marriage is because they want to live with each other forever because they are in love.

I also place on record my thoughts for Shelley Argent, for the families in this country who do have members of their family who identify as being gay, lesbian or homosexual. As a society we do need to now accept that marriage—and given what marriage once was tens or hundreds of years ago—is made of a different fabric in this country today. I also place this on record for people like Neil Halliday, a friend of mine, and my sister-in-law: I commend this report to you both.